A chance to banish the fiscal gap exists now by strategically seizing the opportunity presented by ANGDA gas pipeline.

• Author: McCorkle, Vern C.
• Position: Alaska Business Monthly's 2004 Pipeline Proposal Comparison - Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority

By a referendum vote in 2002, the people of Alaska overwhelmingly mandated the creation of the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority (ANGDA) and charged it with building a gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez within the trans-Alaska oil pipeline right of way.

During the closing days of January, two applications to build gas pipelines were filed with the state: one from the big three North Slope producers (ConocoPhillips, BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. and ExxonMobil Corp.) and the other from MidAmerica Holdings Co., a pipeline operator and gas/electrical service company that is controlled by billionaire investor Warren Buffet through his Berkshire Hathaway Inc. operation. Buffet is joined by Alaska's Cook Inlet Region Inc. and a combine of Alaska regional corporations known as Pacific Star Energy LLC.

The two applications are seen by those who understand such tactics as placeholders in the scheme of international energy politics. The worst of all possible scenarios for Alaska would be to simply stall any project until such time as it is more beneficial for the financial gains of the applicants, Alaska's interests unworthy of consideration.

While the two applications specify no timeline for gas delivery and do not in any way commit to building a pipeline, Alaskans have waited for nearly, three decades to realize economic benefits from North Slope gas. In the meantime, Alaska has sunk deeper and deeper into fiscal crisis, short of money to fund most basic services that state governments are called upon to provide, such as public safety, education and general welfare.

Permitting, planning, engineering and eventual construction envisioned by the two applicants will require another decade (at least) to implement, and the financial return offered by both is far less than what can be realized under the ANGDA project, experts agree.

The matrix that is shown here is designed to outline primary differences between the three approaches to natural gas delivery and is based upon the latest available information from published reports, press releases and experts from all three entities.

PROPOSALS: ANGDA-All Alaska Pipeline ROUTE Prudhoe to Valdez DESTINATION U.S. West Coast, Hawaii the Orient and Asia VOLUME 2.2 Bcf/day expandable to 3.0 PIPE DIAMETER 36-inch LENGTH 800 miles RIGHT of WAY Yes OBTAINED PERMITS All major permits GRANTED in hand now COST $12 billion paid by revenue bonds, not state or taxpayer funds COST per None ALASKAN AK JOBS DURING...